To balance Harry. We will always be exposed to gliders that will spin. Not just old types. And in particular, Europeans love their aerobatics and a fundamental requirement for any true aerobatic aircraft is that in be spin capable. Many manoeuvres (more than 20%) incorporate components of the spin sequence. So both old and many new types will spin now and into the future.
Having identified this continuing risk requires us to train for it. Therefore we had better have spin capable training aircraft available as and when required. Many of us have witnessed accidents where the solo rated pilots have allowed airspeed do fall to dangerous levels. None of these pilots actually expected this to happen to them. They had the same training with regard to safe speed near the ground. In most cases one would have to agree that these accident pilots were under increasing pressure for various reasons. It is human to make mistakes, particularly when a plan is falling apart. Most of us are amature pilots who do not maintain recency. Now put us in a spin capable aircraft where circumstances in the circuit line up against us and it might be good for the average pilot to also be spin current. Loss of airspeed and or mishandling has been a causal factor in every spin accident. But the final outcome could still have been prevented with correct incipient spin recovery (read insignificant height loss) and as a last resort spin recovery. (More height loss depending mainly on pilot technique/currency) Hence the need for spin prevention training, BACKED up by incipient and spin recovery training. I put it to you that a winch site as described does not do enough spin training. The same can be said of clubs with inadequate training aircraft. Aircraft that need special contraptions fitted are included here because they are not spin capable for almost all their flying training due to the severe limitations imposed on them. Therefore they are rarely spin capable when the instructor would like to take advantage of the actual conditions right now to keep his student CURRENT. Most of us are only current immediately following an annual check. Others might hold onto currency by purposely spinning when the opportunity presents. Most of our pilots are scarred of spins. For some, this is good because they will never enter a spin inadvertently. Some of these pilots will never be efficient at thermalling though because they are just to reluctant to test the boundaries required to thermal efficiently. Other pilots in this category remain good safe pilots because they remain current so they recognise safe margins on their personally reduced boundaries. But we all need to face our fears and know how to recover from an inadvertent spin. That is not going to be easy if we only practice spin recovery once a year where the checking instructor is often pressured to accept minimum standards. To stay safe in this regard; Maintain safe speed near the ground Recognise conditions all conditions leading to incipient and full spin. When all this fails you for any reason, know your incipient and if required, full spin recovery techniques. Keep it real and Stay current. PS. To those who think the DG1000 takes more height to recover from the ensuing dive than other types mentioned. You actually achieve flying speed earlier due to a lower zero 'g' drag factor and any speed increase rate in the recovery should be contained by playing 'g' against speed to minimise height loss. This 'full' recovery technique needs to be taught as it applies to all types. To pass, my students never exceed 70kts in our DG1000; similar to the Puchacz. The ASK21 is rarely used due to the time delay in fitting the complicated tail boom weights and checking the reduced CofG range. No other aerobatic are allowed with the weights fitted. Additionally, the spin entry is not assured or it will often recover on its own accord before the spin fully develops. Invariably, more height is lost for the required training. At least that is my experience but I do stay spin current on our training aircraft and in my Cirrus. On 25 Dec 2014 07:43, "Harry" <hw.medlic...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Hi All, > > Sorry to be controversial but I believe most of our spin training is > marginal in saving lives in the real world. Of far greater significance are > design factors reducing the propensity of gliders to spin. Spin related > accidents in Europe have substantially reduced over time. No changes in > spin training but modern gliders are far more forgiving. > > My first club had winch launching only and every year a tug was brought in > and towed gliders to 3,000 ft for spin training. After briefing, students > were quite comfortable going through the standard recovery procedures. > > My second club was winch launching only. Often there were periods when we > had students due for spin training but weather conditions were such that > thermals were not able to give us much by way of height. I experimented > with a Blanik by a spin of the top of a winch launch which after one turn > allowed recovery by 1,000 ft. before using the procedure with a student. OK > in a Blanik but certainly not in some other types > > Despite very careful briefing a few minutes before the results were > entirely different to those when entering a spin at 3,000 ft. Upon seeing > the ground below them the student would immediately pull the control column > right back and sometimes also move the control column away from the > descending wing. It was an involuntary reaction but the one we would use to > keep the glider in a spin. > > So far as I am aware most spin accidents occur close to the ground, below > about 1,000 ft unless one is flying a particularly nasty glider such as an > IS28, which can take over 1,000 ft for the whole process. If what I am > saying is correct, then what are the chances of a pilot using the correct > recovery processes in a low level spin, perhaps a considerable time after > undergoing spin training or refreshing? Not very high. When asked to give a > nervous pilot spin training I would say “We are going to undertake spin > avoidance training” whereupon they would relax. After release at say 3,000 > ft I would establish safe speed near the ground and invite them to > mishandle the glider with rudder and aileron and try and induce a spin. > The message was that if you establish and maintain safe speed near the > ground, a spin is improbable. After that, of course, we undertook standard > spin training. > > Instructors right from a students very first flight should emphasise that > they have established and maintained safe speed near the ground when they > are at a height at which they would not like to attempt a spin recovery. > Just as importantly, that their lookout procedures are excellent. My > message to a student or visitor in an introductory flight was that I could > not see where we going from the back seat and that their good lookout was > needed to keep us safe, > > Harry Medlicott > > > > > > > > > *From:* Peter (PCS3) <p...@internode.on.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 24, 2014 10:48 PM > *To:* aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net > *Subject:* [Aus-soaring] Spinning Re: IS-28B CQC's last flying day: > > > On 24/12/2014 8:41 PM, Colin Collum wrote: > > G’day All, > > One of the ironies of gliding seems to be that modern sleek gliders are > not only faster in virtually every sense, they are also safer in that many > of them are much less likely to spin, but unfortunately our novice pilot > can’t be guaranteed to always fly an aircraft that won’t spin. > > I was instructing a girl in the front seat of a Twin Astir and said to > her: "Twin Astirs just mush instead of spinning" To my surprise, she > managed to spin it easily (because of her light weight) and it required > full opposite rudder to stop it as well as easing the stick forward and a > very steep dive enough for a loop. > > I was in a Ventus 2b on a Xcountry having lunch in a thermal. I reached > behind me to grab the water tube; the bottle was strapped on parcel shelf > above and behind me and the tube had slipped down beside me out of reach > and I was going to find it from the bottle. When I looked round, the > paddocks were in my direct field of vision rotating. I absolutely had no > idea I was in a spin. Full opposite rudder took a loooong time to stop the > rotation and the height lost was significant but fortunately did not end in > an outlanding. > > I recite this to all my students when instructing on spins. > > PeterS > > > So we need to teach them in aircraft that can be spun safely, but we > also need to keep them keen and I must say that when I was learning 10 > years ago, even then the IS28s gave the impression of being way too > out-of-date in their performance and appearance. After going solo I > graduated to the giddy heights of a Junior—the novelty wore off that pretty > quickly when from 8,500’ AGL I couldn’t make it 40km home at best LD into a > light breeze without another thermal! > > > > It’s no use saying I learned in one of those, and if it was good enough > for me then it is good enough for the current generation of learners. We > need to keep them interested, a little excited, able to progress quickly > enough for it to be satisfying and also very safe. > > > > I don’t claim to know the answers, but I doubt if it is IS28s, K13s, K6s > and Juniors. K21s? Probably, but I don’t know what to recommend for a first > single-seater. > > > > Merry Xmas, > > > > Colin > > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net > To check or change subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net > To check or change subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring >
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
